User talk:Tyyyyypo

This is Tyyyyypo's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dave Opstad (January 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Curb Safe Charmer was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dave Opstad and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Dave Opstad, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tyyyyypo! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dave Opstad (January 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Rusalkii was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Not seeing a lot of independent coverage.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dave Opstad and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Dave Opstad, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Rusalkii (talk) 01:19, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dave Opstad (February 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Devonian Wombat was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dave Opstad and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Dave Opstad, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dave Opstad (May 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Kaleeb18 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dave Opstad and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Dave Opstad, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 02:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your review @Kaleeb18, I am wondering if you could help me understand why this article has not enough references in compare to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Collins_(Unicode)? They are both the creators of unicode. Without the development of the unicode no wikipedia would exist.

Thank you very much,

Olli Tyyyyypo (talk) 13:01, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that it does't have enough references, it's that the references are not independent, reliable sources. In order for someone/something to have an article it needs independent reliable sources covering it to establish that it is notable. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much @Kaleeb18 for the extra explanation. When I compare the two articles the one from Lee Collins has four references from three different sources (Unicode, IMUG and ABC Australia). The article about Dave I wrote has two of the same (Unicode, IMUG) + at least 4 other independent source (PC MAGAZINE, luc.devroye.org, Fonts & Encodings (p. 848. ISBN 0-596-10242-9) Macworld and W3c). I get it, that the references from Monotype and Github may not be independent, but is there anything wrong with others? Any help is much appreciated. Tyyyyypo (talk) 16:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well I dont't know much about the sources so I cannot comment really on the reliability of them ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 16:47, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry to bother you with this, but maybe I miss something – on the one hand you are saying you don't know much about the sources and on the other hand you have rejected the article? I try to make this article go public for a couple month, because unicode is one of the most important thing in the digital field. The internet would not work without it and therefore it's very important to mention the founders of the unicode. Any help with it would be much appreciated. Any advice from you is much appreciated – really :) Think about any emojis you may send through messages – all this would not work without unicode. And Dave is one of the co-founders of it. Tyyyyypo (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well I know that the Unicode articles do not contribute to the nobility of the article and should be used sparingling as it is a primary source. PC Magazine looks most likely reliable. Luc devroye is not. Google patents does not establish notability. Monotype may or may not be reliable, but I don't think so. Github and W3c don't establish notability ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 18:47, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Opstad, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.
Comment: @Kaleeb18: I didn't see this discussion when I WP:BOLDly moved the page, but feel the same. I suggest discussing any issues with my reasoning at Talk:Dave Opstad where I wrote it.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 01:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Psiĥedelisto and @Kaleeb18 Thank you very, very much for your help. I much appreciate it!!! Tyyyyypo (talk) 07:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]